Young America's Foundation Scores Major Free Speech Victory Over UC Berkeley
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Young America's Foundation scored a major free speech victory Monday over the University of California-Berkeley.
After losing a lawsuit filed by YAF, the university must pay the organization $70,000 and rescind policies that discriminate against conservative speakers on campus.
"This landmark victory for free expression means UC Berkeley can no longer wantonly treat conservative students as second-class members of its community while ignoring the guaranteed protections of the First Amendment," YAF released in a statement. "No longer can UC Berkeley place a 3:00 p.m. curfew on conservative speech. No longer can UC Berkeley ban advertisements for Young America’s Foundation-sponsored campus lectures. And no longer can UC Berkeley relegate conservative speakers to remote or inconvenient lecture halls on campus while giving leftist speakers access to preferred locations."
"Further, the policy that allowed Berkeley administrators to charge conservative students $20,000 for security to host Ben Shapiro—an amount three times greater than the fee charged to leftist students to host liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor—is gone. YAF and UC Berkeley agreed to a fee schedule that treats all students equally. Unless students are handling money or serving alcohol at an event, the security fee will be zero," the statement continues. "This win for free speech—a blow to radical Antifa mobs—means university facilities will be available to students on a first-come, first-served basis. No longer will the community’s reaction to speech be factored into decisions regarding lecture venues, meaning intolerant leftists cannot use the “heckler’s veto” to determine who is allowed to speak or where they’re permitted to appear."
The lawsuit against Berkeley was fought by The Dhillon Law Group on behalf of YAF.
"This landmark settlement means that all students at UC Berkeley now have the exciting opportunity to hear a variety of viewpoints on campus without the artificial tax of security fees selectively imposed on disfavored speech,"The Dhillon Law Group managing partner Harmeet K. Dhillon released in a statement. "Today's settlement will have a liberty impact on generations of students at our state's leading public higher education institution. I'm grateful to YAF and BCR for their courage and leadership on the fundamental issue of free speech on campus. The impact of this settlement cannot be overstated." YAF continues to fight for free speech on campus across the country and regularly brings conservative ideas to students.
✔
Landmark # freespeech settlement for clients @ yaf and @ BerkeleyCRs filed with the NDCA today, and may be found at link. Under this new policy, UC Berkeley abolishes its prior speech policy and replaces it with one that treats all speakers equally: https://www. dhillonlaw.com/lawsuits/uc-be rkeley-free-speech-lawsuit/ …
Tags
Who is online
95 visitors
“This win for free speech—a blow to radical Antifa mobs—means university facilities will be available to students on a first-come, first-served basis. No longer will the community’s reaction to speech be factored into decisions regarding lecture venues, meaning intolerant leftists cannot use the “heckler’s veto” to determine who is allowed to speak or where they’re permitted to appear."
It’s always great to see free speech win out over the PC snowflake mentality of places like the administration at the University of California Berkeley, the people’s republic of berzerkeky. These were great results for conservative students and for real free speech. That Antifa lost its hecklers veto over our speakers on campus was delicious as well. Now if only we can do that to all internet communication companies.
Nice win, and long overdue.
Why wouldn't a college want a variety of viewpoints to be heard?
That is the question all secular progressives must be made to answer.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the Spring semester when YAF and Turning Points USA 🇺🇸 invite conservative speakers to address their campus groups and the public at the People’s Republic of Berzerkely....
Imagine an institution of higher learning stifling speech they don't agree with.
Gee, almost sounds like something Nazis in Germany would have done.
They and progressives here are so similar in so many ways.
It's refreshing to see someone stand up for free speech as opposed to comparing the 1st Amendment to fascism.
This is a satisfying example of our system at work.
Now we are going after internet news and social media sites. They got immunity from defamation and libel/slander suits from the government in exchange for them not editing and content control censorship of their sites. Congress is considering stripping them of their immunity due to their reneging on their agreement not to engage in view point censorship. Then they will have the same standards as print and electronic media.
So you are against net neutrality and want the government to control content. What could go wrong?
You have no idea what opening Pandora's box is going to do to your favorite sites.
The descriptive hyperbole you have become so attracted to and repetitive of will become a liability for right wing sites and yourself.
If that's what you want, I'm all for it. Until the first conservative gets nailed like the Saudi national did to Glenn Beck. It'll happen with frequency and the right will be screaming about a law they brought on themself.
That Pandora must be one hot chick; everyone keeps talking about her box!
I was going to post on Vic's article yet it is now locked so posting it here.
Seems YAF has a lot of money behind it. I don't blame the college for settling (though we don't see what was addressed as far as new rules) as the organization has people like the Devos family and the Koch brothers behind it with a boatload of funds. They have enough cash to keep a lawsuit alive for years, straining the finances of the college.
Also the Heritage foundation pops up as well as the state policy network. Seems they are all intertwined.
YAF is an associate member of SPN.
So they are part of a group that has been known to want to reduce public education.
Seems Ann Coulter and Greg Gutfeld were members as one of their goals seems to be putting more conservative members into more prominent journalism jobs.
Seems YAF has a lot of money behind it. I don't blame the college for settling (though we don't see what was addressed as far as new rules) as the organization has people like the Devos family and the Koch brothers behind it with a boatload of funds. They have enough cash to keep a lawsuit alive for years, straining the finances of the college.
That would have to be some court case:
"among its various revenue streams, such as federal and state grants, the campus’s largest and most stable contributions come in the form of endowments, currently valued at $4.3 billion."
http://ww w.dailycal.org/2018/05/08/generous-gifts-uc-berkeleys-endowment-fund/
I would like to get you on record. Are you agreeing with UC Berkeley - that they really didn't discriminate?
(BTW I closed my article because I discovered that this one already existed)
I tried to post twice and it said cannot be posted. I thought something was wrong on my end. Finally refreshed the page and read what you and SP said. haha
To be honest, I don't think any pundits should be speaking on a campus. They should stop all of them, no matter the political stripe. It is supposed to be an institution of higher learning, not a political rally. Make them hold such events off campus.
Interesting...You should have seen it during the late 60's.
Does that mean you won't be answering my question?
I know. They have always been political. Doesn't mean they should be. If I was paying to go there and learn, I wouldn't want all of the distractions. But that is just me.
As for your question, it is not a simple yes or no Q&A. Did they charge conservative speakers more? Yes. Did they intentionally stop conservative speakers? I would say no.
I appreciate the answer.
It seems the standard on the left to shut down all political speech at institutions of higher education if hearing their own point of view means have to tolerate the other side speaking too. To them no speech is preferred to giving an opposing view any voice at all.